Purpose

The clinical significance of a positive surgical margin after partial nephrectomy remains controversial. The association between positive margin and risk of disease recurrence in patients with clinically localized renal neoplasms undergoing partial nephrectomy was evaluated.

Materials and methods

A retrospective multi-institutional review of 1,240 patients undergoing partial nephrectomy for clinically localized renal cell carcinoma between 2006 and 2013 was performed. Recurrence-free survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and evaluated as a function of positive surgical margin with the log rank test and Cox models adjusting for tumor size, grade, histology, pathological stage, focality and laterality. The relationship between positive margin and risk of relapse was evaluated independently for pathological high risk (pT2-3a or Fuhrman grades III-IV) and low risk (pT1 and Fuhrman grades I-II) groups.

Results

A positive surgical margin was encountered in 97 (7.8%) patients. Recurrence developed in 69 (5.6%) patients during a median followup of 33 months, including 37 (10.3%) with high risk disease (eg pT2-pT3a or Fuhrman grade III-IV). A positive margin was associated with an increased risk of relapse on multivariable analysis (HR 2.08, 95% CI 1.09-3.97, p=0.03) but not with site of recurrence. In a stratified analysis based on pathological features, a positive surgical margin was significantly associated with a higher risk of recurrence in cases considered high risk (HR 7.48, 95% CI 2.75-20.34, p <0.001) but not low risk (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.08-4.75, p=0.647).

Conclusions

Positive surgical margins after partial nephrectomy increase the risk of disease recurrence, primarily in patients with adverse pathological features.

Purpose

The clinical significance of a positive surgical margin after partial nephrectomy remains controversial. The association between positive margin and risk of disease recurrence in patients with clinically localized renal neoplasms undergoing partial nephrectomy was evaluated.

Materials and methods

A retrospective multi-institutional review of 1,240 patients undergoing partial nephrectomy for clinically localized renal cell carcinoma between 2006 and 2013 was performed. Recurrence-free survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and evaluated as a function of positive surgical margin with the log rank test and Cox models adjusting for tumor size, grade, histology, pathological stage, focality and laterality. The relationship between positive margin and risk of relapse was evaluated independently for pathological high risk (pT2-3a or Fuhrman grades III-IV) and low risk (pT1 and Fuhrman grades I-II) groups.

Results

A positive surgical margin was encountered in 97 (7.8%) patients. Recurrence developed in 69 (5.6%) patients during a median followup of 33 months, including 37 (10.3%) with high risk disease (eg pT2-pT3a or Fuhrman grade III-IV). A positive margin was associated with an increased risk of relapse on multivariable analysis (HR 2.08, 95% CI 1.09-3.97, p=0.03) but not with site of recurrence. In a stratified analysis based on pathological features, a positive surgical margin was significantly associated with a higher risk of recurrence in cases considered high risk (HR 7.48, 95% CI 2.75-20.34, p <0.001) but not low risk (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.08-4.75, p=0.647).

Conclusions

Positive surgical margins after partial nephrectomy increase the risk of disease recurrence, primarily in patients with adverse pathological features.

BACKGROUND: Standards for reporting surgical adverse events (AEs) vary widely within the scientific literature. Failure to adequately capture AEs hinders efforts to measure the safety of healthcare delivery and improve the quality of care. The aim of the present study is to assess the prevalence and typology of perioperative AE reporting guidelines among surgery and anesthesiology journals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In November 2021, three independent reviewers queried journal lists from the SCImago Journal & Country Rank (SJR) portal (www.scimagojr.com), a bibliometric indicator database for surgery and anesthesiology academic journals. Journal characteristics were summarized using SCImago, a bibliometric indicator database extracted from Scopus journal data. Quartile 1 (Q1) was considered the top quartile and Q4 bottom quartile based on the journal impact factor. Journal author guidelines were collected to determine whether AE reporting recommendations were included and, if so, the preferred reporting procedures. RESULTS: Of 1409 journals queried, 655 (46.5%) recommended surgical AE reporting. Journals most likely to recommend AE reporting were: by category surgery (59.1%), urology (53.3%), and anesthesia (52.3%); in top SJR quartiles (i.e. more influential); by region, based in Western Europe (49.8%), North America (49.3%), and the Middle East (48.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Surgery and anesthesiology journals do not consistently require or provide recommendations on perioperative AE reporting. Journal guidelines regarding AE reporting should be standardized and are needed to improve the quality of surgical AE reporting with the ultimate goal of improving patient morbidity and mortality.

Background

With the advancement of imaging technology, focal therapy (FT) has been gaining acceptance for the treatment of select patients with localized prostate cancer (CaP). We aim to provide details of a formal physician consensus on the utilization of FT for patients with CaP who are discontinuing active surveillance (AS).

Methods

A 3-stage Delphi consensus on CaP and FT was conducted. Consensus was defined as agreement by ≥80% of physicians. An in-person meeting was attended by 17 panelists to formulate the consensus statement.

Results

Fifty-six respondents participated in this interdisciplinary consensus study (82% urologist, 16% radiologist, 2% radiation oncology). The participants confirmed that there is a role for FT in men discontinuing AS (48% strongly agree, 39% agree). The benefit of FT over radical therapy for men coming off AS is: less invasive (91%), has a greater likelihood to preserve erectile function (91%), has a greater likelihood to preserve urinary continence (91%), has fewer side effects (86%), and has early recovery post-treatment (80%). Patients will need to undergo mpMRI of the prostate and/or a saturation biopsy to determine if they are potential candidates for FT. Our limitations include respondent's biases and that the participants of this consensus may not represent the larger medical community.

Conclusions

FT can be offered to men coming off AS between the age of 60 to 80 with grade group 2 localized cancer. This consensus from a multidisciplinary, multi-institutional, international expert panel provides a contemporary insight utilizing FT for CaP in select patients who are discontinuing AS.